Voyager instrument cooling after heater turned off

Jan 18, 2012

(PhysOrg.com) -- In order to reduce power consumption, mission managers have turned off a heater on part of NASA's Voyager 1 spacecraft, dropping the temperature of its ultraviolet spectrometer instrument more than 23 degrees Celsius (41 degrees Fahrenheit). It is now operating at a temperature below minus 79 degrees Celsius (minus 110 degrees Fahrenheit), the coldest temperature that the instrument has ever endured.

This heater shut-off is a step in the careful management of the diminishing electrical power so that the Voyager spacecraft can continue to collect and transmit data through 2025.

At the moment, the spectrometer continues to collect and return data. It was originally designed to operate at temperatures as low as minus 35 degrees Celsius (minus 31 degrees Fahrenheit), but it has continued to operate in ever chillier temperatures as heaters around it have been turned off over the last 17 years. It was not known if the spectrometer would continue working, but since 2005, it has been operating at minus 56 degrees Celsius (69 degrees Fahrenheit.) So engineers are encouraged that the instrument has continued to operate, even after the nearby heater was turned off in December. (The spectrometer is likely operating at a temperature somewhat lower than minus 79 degrees Celsius, or minus 110 degrees Fahrenheit, but the temperature detector does not go any lower.)

Scientists and mission managers will continue to monitor the spectrometer's performance. It was very active during Voyager 1's encounters with Jupiter and Saturn, and since then an international team led by scientists in France has been analyzing the spectrometer's data.

This latest heater shut-off was actually part of the nearby infrared spectrometer, which itself has not been operational on Voyager 1 since 1998.

Related Stories

(PhysOrg.com) -- Engineers are busy cooling the science instrument on NASA's Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer, or WISE. The spacecraft is scheduled to blast into space from Vandenberg Air Force Base in ...

Slight clearing of still-dusty Martian skies has improved the energy situation for both Spirit and Opportunity, allowing controllers to increase the rovers' science observations. Spirit is even being commanded ...

Typical clovers have three leaves, unless you happen to be lucky, and NASA's Aqua satellite has provided three different views of Ireland to mark Saint Patrick's Day on March 17, 2011. With the luck o' the ...

Several days after Rosetta's close flyby of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko on 14 February 2015, images taken on this day by OSIRIS, the scientific imaging system on board, have now been downlinked to Earth. ...

Like coins, most comet have both heads and tails. Occasionally, during a close passage of the Sun, a comet's head will be greatly diminished yet still retain a classic cometary outline. Rarely are we left ...

This week marked the completion of an important step on the path to spacecraft assembly, test, and launch operations for the Origins Spectral Interpretation Resource Identification Security Regolith Explorer ...

NASA's Dawn spacecraft has returned new images captured on approach to its historic orbit insertion at the dwarf planet Ceres. Dawn will be the first mission to successfully visit a dwarf planet when it enters ...

User comments : 22

The Voyager is by far the most incredible journey of mankind. I don't know why we do not have hundreds of these types of crafts firing off in all directions towards many of the interesting places in our solar system and beyond. Best money ever spent. The design should have been cloned and reused dozens of times at least.

Keep in mind the "grand tour" launch window for the Voyager mission only happens once every 176 or 189 years (different sites have different numbers). Sending copies of this craft every which direction would be very wasteful, as many of its instruments and cameras were designed with very specific conditions in mind for fast planetary flybys. These craft were also built using mostly hand crafted custom parts, so it would be very expensive and wasteful. Not to mention that the launch rockets of the day were quite expensive as well. Voyager filled its "niche" very well but now we have need for different craft.

The purpose built orbiters (voyagers were not made to orbit) like Galileo, Cassini, and MGS were vast improvements on Voyager design.) And of course the rovers and the Huygens probe were pretty cool to.

SpaceX is working on more bulk-like manufacturing of space tech. I forsee after a while they might build more than lift vehicles.

If the (nearby) Universe is isotropic, then what more might be the return on investment?

The nearby universe isn't isotropic. Voyager already found shifting and turbulent heliopause. It would be interesting to map that in more directions than one.

Remember that the Voyager probes did a lot along the way: flybys of planets and moons, measurements of solar wind, etc.They're not meant to be better at poking at the universe at large than other instruments we have.

More spacecrafts like Voyager are not and were not sent to space because the Space Program is (unfortunately) ruled by politicians that have no clue about science.Therefore, maned missions which are 1000 times more expensive are preferred at the expensive of unmanned ones like this jewell of a spacecraft.

"V___ger" also inspired the first "Star Trek" movie, in late 1979. "V'ger is that which seeks the Creator" and studied the "carbon units" through the Deltan Ilia played by a former Miss India, actress Persis Khambatta.

Unfortunately no one wants to say how we are going to come up with the money for these nice little space crafts that we are just going to send out in all directions and get.... what type of information from them again? Something only scientists care about? We need more projects like Hubble where the public can actually say, well at least I got something for my money... instead of, great there is no solar winds at the X million mile marker.... great.....

I'm all for scientific exploration but the money has to come from somewhere and I believe people in the US and now Europe have more important things to spend their money on, like, oh I don't know... mortgages and what not.

@Shifty0x88: Cost of Cassini was two days in Iraq. Remember there were EIGHT Hubble-sized/style telescopes (KH-11) spying on us before there was one looking at the stars.

Science is the starving mangy dog under the barbarians' tables. We are tossed scraps and gristle while the warriors feast.

"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. The world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children."- Dwight D. Eisenhower

I don't understand the "save power" concept as the power plant is a plutonium thermo-electric generator which makes power continuously whether it's used or not and there is no real storage capacity (battery) on board.

I expect they meant to say they are having to work in a lower power envelop because the power plant constantly decays.

.. in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed ..

Sweet sentiment but fundamentally flawed reasoning. The money spent on weaponry employs people that purchase goods from businesses that further employ people. This money does feed and clothe people, pay for education and health. Technological advances are made that enhance our lives through defense spending.

We don't give the guns or bombs or warships the money. We give people the money.

The only people who generally suffer from the US military industry, are those sad sacks that want to interfere or attack America.

bottomlesssoul > I had the same interrogations. But it might be that the power output is diminishing with time and that they need to shut down some parts to keep enough electricity for the essential parts.

bluehigh > your reasoning is flawed too, using this money on science instead of weapons would have distributed the same amount of money in the economy, but would have produced an output in science and technology while spending it on wars doesn't have any good output.

And in the people suffering from the US military industry, you forget the ones that have oil wanted by america, and also all the innocent people killed by error in the wars.

Defence is one thing (and is necessary), going to war abroad is another. I fail to see how the Irak war was a defense war.

When Voyager was sent, when America walked on the Moon, the defense budget was way lower than today.And it has been a long time since an American walked on the Moon, I am 27 tomorrow, that means that since I was born, the Moon as seen no one. America could sent people on the Moon, today it can't even launch people in space..

You quoted a one sided view from a US president. I am sure that there is a quote from a US president that insists the police action in Iraq was defensive. I am sad at your failure.

.. the defense budget was way lower than today.

Oh, just because you say so? Given the increase in the rest of the worlds spending on weapons and adjusted for economic growth and inflation, are you sure? Provide a reference or you are just spouting false beliefs.

America can launch people into space almost whenever they choose. Just because the road-map to privatization, and exploration priorities, does not suit you is .. well, unfortunate for you.

SpaceX- to the space station soon. Virgin Galactic. Bigalow. Aerospace - all American space pioneering companies. Only in America the Great.

Big advance of physics came from military research, of course nuclear bombs grew out of that, which potentially could be the game-ending technology that negates anything positive that came out of military research spending. And some time in the future nuclear power might be the best ticket to becoming a multi planet species which might save us from extinction.

Really, only in recent times is military spending in such a grey area. Hopefully that trend continues, because it really sucks when military spending becomes your primary "necessity".

No. Artsist and scientists share somthing: They are driven. They don't need a conflict, threat or pressure of any kind to give their utmost. They do it because it's fun.

Conflict has only the effect that a lot of resources are suddenly pumped into certain areas (usually military in nature) which allows scientists to realize more of their ideas at once. But conflict per se does not enhance human creativity/innovation.